Partial solution for lb(big brain idea that'll probably never be implemented)
Before I get started, I just want to make it clear that I have no stake in the leaderboard debate. I don't have a lb banner/badge, nor am I aching for an opportunity to earn one. I barely pve, finish almost every event with 0 points, and don't even have a full set of gear on my 81. I'm content with my old gauntlet banner, and I would be in favor of the gauntlet returning so more people could get a banner. I could easily sit by and watch y'all continue to bicker while eating my popcorn, BUT
if sts wants to solve the leaderboard drama, this is how they could PARTIALLY fix it. This solution wouldn't work for every section, only the ones that have the top x number of times listed like hauntlet or planar arena.
If you look at the hauntlet leaderboard, there are 25 time slots. With groups of four, you could theoretically have 100 different names on there. If you look at the leaderboard right now, there are 14 names total across all 25 slots. This highlights the perceived problem that some people have with the current iteration of the leaderboard: accessibility. When sts created a hauntlet lb with 25 team slots, I doubt they intended for only 14 people to appear on that leaderboard. Why are there only 14 names? Because this is what the leaderboards look like
1. Mike, Bob, Timmy, Joe
2. Mike, Bob, Timmy
3. Mike, Bob, Joe
4. Mike, Timmy, Joe
5. Bob, Timmy, Joe
6. Mike, Bob
7. Mike, Timmy
8. Mike, Joe
9. Mike
etc.
I think you get the point. Now imagine if the hauntlet leaderboard functioned differently. Instead of ranking the leaderboard based on the top 25 times, such that the same names can be repeated, what if each player could only appear once, and was ranked based on their personal best time? Imagine this: Mike, Bob, Timmy, and Joe run Hauntlet in 10 seconds. The next day, Mike solos Hauntlet in 8 seconds. What would the leaderboard look like?
1. Mike - 8seconds
2. Bob - 10s
2. Timmy - 10s
2. Joe - 10s
5. Capt.America -12s
6. Iron Man -14s
7. Hulk -16s
8. Thor - 18s
9. Spiderman - 20s
I think we can all agree the second one looks better than the first one. Furthermore, with a system like this, I think Hauntlet and Arena sections should be expanded to 50 slots(and maybe 20 slots for bogs/swamp). Why is 50 the right number? As mentioned before, the theoretical number of people that could appear is 100. But just because it's possible to have 100 names, I don't believe sts intended to have 100 different people on the leaderboard every season. So it has to be less than 100. Why not leave it at 25? I suppose 25 is better than 14, but barely. I think if it was expanded to 50, this would provide enough added opportunity for people to earn a spot on these leaderboards without overflooding it. Honor pvp has up to 50 slots PER CLASS and I don't see anybody complaining that it has too many. And remember, as presently constructed, up to 100 people could earn a spot. To say that 50 people actually earning a spot is too many would be absurd.
What are the shortcomings of this system? Sure, those same 14 players could just carry 36 of their friends and then nothing has really changed for the community. I'm sure some people would try to do that. Other than that, the side that wants the leaderboard to change should be on board with a system like this. What about the people that want the leaderboard to remain as is? I would ask you to honestly answer this question.
Do you think there is a player that actively wants to limit leaderboard spots/kick other people off? I do. Why would somebody do that? Because they feel that if other people have the same thing, it makes them less special. They're concerned about their pixel ego. I'm not trying to call anybody out. I'm not saying this is how all the timed runners act, or how most of them act, or how 10% of them act. I'm saying I believe there is at least 1 person that acts this way. I think about most things in the context of probability distributions. There are few absolutes in this world. Pro tip for multiple choice exams: any options with absolute words like "always" or "never" are probably the wrong choice. To say that none of the players on the leaderboard want to deprive other players of spots/banners/badges is a bold claim. That being said, I would wager that the probability that >= 1 person tries to limit leaderboard is greater than the probability that = 0 people try to limit the leaderboard. For those that don't understand stats, those 2 probabilities must add up to 1, or 100%, and I believe there is more than a 50% probability that somebody out there wants to limit leaderboard spots.
Maybe you disagree with me. I get it. Most timed runners aren't actively trying to deprive other people of leaderboard spots. They just like to run with friends, compete, and try to get the best times possible and they don't want leaderboard changes to be made that would hinder their playstyle. Can you at least agree that even if you have wholesome intentions like those in the previous sentence, the current iteration of the leaderboard is fueling a negative perception amongst the community like the one I described in the previous paragraph? You could be the nicest player ever, only want to help friends get on the leaderboard and have zero personal ambitions, but when people see your name listed 20 times they are going to question your intentions. What's more likely? That every single person will assume you have good intentions, or that some people will assume you have selfish intentions and want to hog lb to limit the rewards handed out? If you can't agree to that then you are either being willfully ignorant or somehow haven't noticed the drama on forums lately surrounding the leaderboard.
Given that my change to the leaderboard would greatly reduce this strife and ongoing drama, would you timed runners be open to this kind of change? It shouldn't impact your playstyle. In fact it might enhance it, given there would be greater opportunities for you to run with other players/more of your friends without worrying about knocking your old times off the lb. Some players are opposed to the idea of your name only showing up once on the lb because it takes away your reason to play the game. However, since the lb would be ranked according to your personal best time, you would still have a reason to run these maps throughout the season to improve your time/rank even though your name shows up only once. Maybe they could add a title for the top 5, "Shuyal god", "Arena God" to further incentivize the top players. Plus, if you are one of those people who likes to hog the leaderboard, you still have elite dungeons/crypts to monopolize.
Why this will probably never be implemented and this is all just a big waste of time and energy: The leaderboard has always been unfair and it isn't worth sts' time to fix it. For those who don't know, way back in the day the hauntlet lb was dominated by lvl 15s. Is it because they were the best players? No. The way hauntlet scaled made it so lvl 15 was the easiest level to run it at. Sure they had good strats, but they also had the best lvl 15 gear. Furthermore, they abused shady and surge, the second most broken and overpowered pet ever put in the game. So you had the same few names listed over and over, season after season, using items that nobody else could acquire...sound familiar? Has anything changed? no, and its been this way for years. What happened to the pvp leaderboards? People were dummy farming to get banners and it literally wasn't worth their time to deal with the drama so they deleted it. LB doesn't make them any $$ and so they have little incentive to do anything about it. Not to mention the nearly decade long precedent of the leaderboard being unfair.
Why did I write this post? Why does it have so many questions? Cuz I'm stoned and bored
tldr: This is the middleground. I dare you make a thread with something better.
Originally Posted by BaronB
Bookmarks